We've got loads of room. Whats the alternative, we never build another house? Strict two child policy across the board? Utter economic stagnation?
Hong Kong's "coffin cubicles"
- Thread starter scorza
- Start date
and even the ample green spaces we have we cant use properly
i wish they would build on green space
You really have it against the planning system, dont you?
Without it we would end up with an utter mess as seen in places such as the United States. Allowing permanent dwelling on land in non permanent structures is a recipe to see the countryside littered with caravans and makeshift housing.
of course I do as should any sensible person, and no it does not need to be an utter mess, most countries cope we are the odd ones out.You really have it against the planning system, dont you?
With huge mortgages and a life of debt, with no other options.
I really get the rage when I hear politicians and others say "build more homes" as if that's some kind of silver bullet.
That's all well and good but the only thing that will happen is that landlords, investors, overseas oligarchs will just buy them up and the prices will keep rising. We need sterner tax on empty properties, second homes, and lettings generally. We still give people a discount on their council tax if it's their second home or an empty property ffs!
People with an empty second home should be absolutely rinsed for it, not appeased!
There is absolutely zero point building more homes in the UK unless we change taxation etc to stop benefitting BTL and investment in homes as a source of income. Roll on land value tax, I say.
That's all well and good but the only thing that will happen is that landlords, investors, overseas oligarchs will just buy them up and the prices will keep rising. We need sterner tax on empty properties, second homes, and lettings generally. We still give people a discount on their council tax if it's their second home or an empty property ffs!
People with an empty second home should be absolutely rinsed for it, not appeased!There is absolutely zero point building more homes in the UK unless we change taxation etc to stop benefitting BTL and investment in homes as a source of income. Roll on land value tax, I say.
How would you foresee the state of the green belt around London, should it be mandated that people have the right to dwell permanently in makeshift/non permanent housing, on any land to which they have rights to?
No farmer in their right mind *wouldnt* simply lease their fields out, to become caravan parks (trailer parks). We'd end up with enormous slums covering hundreds of acres, built up all around the city, as seen elsewhere in the world.
im not seeing the issue, and i think you over estimate how many people don't want nice expensive houses, we are talking a minority here.
Theres' also a huge number of ways to implement cheaper housing, could for example start by council making small estates with roads and plots and allowing people to buy/rent(only available to those that actually live there and has to be sold if they move away). We don't just need to reduce house prices, we need alternatives for those of us who don't want a live of debt just because of over the top planning laws.
But I thought the only cause of housing issues is dirty immigrants?
You are honestly "not seeing the issue" with the idea to mandate that people are free to dwell permanently on any land to which they have rights to, seriously?
Lets make it a simple scenario for the sake of the message;
I am Mr Farmer, i own 1000 acres of green belt land around Gerrards Cross and Watford. Suddenly they allow me to park caravans anywhere and let people live in them, permanently.
Do I:
a) Continue to grow wheat
b) Sublet my 1000 acres to 10000 individuals, and create a huge trailer park infilling between all of the local villages, with great access to the M25 and the tube network into London? Thus creating a gigantic slum/trailer park.
Miles and miles of this, as seen elsewhere in the world:
You are honestly "not seeing the issue" with the idea to mandate that people are free to dwell permanently on any land to which they have rights to, seriously?
Lets make it a simple scenario for the sake of the message;
I am Mr Farmer, i own 1000 acres of green belt land around Gerrards Cross and Watford. Suddenly they allow me to park caravans anywhere and let people live in them, permanently.
Do I:
a) Continue to grow wheat
b) Sublet my 1000 acres to 10000 individuals, and create a huge trailer park infilling between all of the local villages, with great access to the M25 and the tube network into London? Thus creating a gigantic slum/trailer park.
Miles and miles of this, as seen elsewhere in the world:
why is it a slum? oh yeah because that's your point of view rather than reality, you can still have rules on dumping etc.
again you are over estimating how many people would want this live style.
oh and lobvley picture, why not find some from france or rest of europe which allows this.
It's almost as though having a successful economy results in a growing population.
Fortunately we won't have this problem in the future.
Call it a trailer park if you wish, calling substandard housing if you wish, whatever you like. Regardless we would create enormous instant areas such as that all over our country. Honestly if you still cant see the issue, and the other myriad of social issues which stem from situations such as this, which would be created, then god help you
I dont think i am, the need for housing is enormous, the idea that people could escape house shares and be debt free is not one which people would pass up. I would bet that such an offering would be overwhelmed.
and god help you with your narrow views, what social issues would this be?Call it a trailer park if you wish, calling substandard housing if you wish, whatever you like. Regardless we would create enormous instant areas such as that all over our country. Honestly if you still cant see the issue, and the other myriad of social issues which stem from situations such as this, which would be created, then god help you
I dont think i am, the need for housing is enormous, the idea that people could escape house shares and be debt free is not one which people would pass up. I would bet that such an offering would be overwhelmed.
The problem with mentioning anything to you Glaucus, is that you simply never, ever, understand the point or understand why your views are not commonly held. You then accuse others of having the narrow views when actually you need to consider that the reason that your views do not match the status quo is because they themselves are the narrow views. Have you stopped to actually consider what i've posted? The views you hold would be an utter disaster and i have only touched on the immediate obvious issue on the surface
The problem with mentioning anything to you Glaucus, is that you simply never, ever, understand the point or understand why your views are not commonly held. You then accuse others of having the narrow views when actually you need to consider that the reason that your views do not match the status quo is because they themselves are the narrow views. Have you stopped to actually consider what i've posted?
or teh problem is you just never actually give any substance to your statements or think.
again what social issues, or posting a slum, which i haven't said. did i say get rid of all rules and regulations? did I say get rid of minimum insulation and standard of living etc?
trouble is you often apply the worst possible case and never thing about how it could be implemented or even how it is implemented in other places. you jsut go it doesn't work over here, so thats that.
I thought i had broken it down quite simply, i gave a very basic worked example to try and help you understand as i know you are hard to communicate things to.
Consider whether your views are the narrow ones (and in essence, ill thought). Everyone else can see it and regularly call you on it.
Consider whether your views are the narrow ones (and in essence, ill thought). Everyone else can see it and regularly call you on it.
they arent, and they arent very often different either. Most of the time they are in line with most people.
and no your example is not very good at all, comparing to a slum, with no regulations or over sites. Again you have totally ignored how this could be implemented with rules and regulations to overcome your issues.
Who would collect the rubish and run the sewage systems for all these new dwellings with zero planning?
Who's policing the vast low density area with no aminieties etc?
Cause while this may have been kind of ok many many many years ago these days it sounds like the resurgence of cholera in the uk.
who said no planning, i don't know maybe the system already set up, the council.
Oh well in that case no it will never happen. Councils don't have the money to cover such a scheme.
And if you have planning, if you have water, power, roads, police rubbish collection etc you haven't made your low cost set free utopia you've made the world's most expensive caravan park...great for commuting to London though you are gonna need a mortgage to get a space